BUSH NUKES BAGHDAD - BLAMES BIN LADEN - INVADES IRAN

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49831

Its too obvious...

The CIA/NSA aligning "armed with Nukes"-Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri, the Al-CIA-da Scapegoats with Iran, to have a justified target after another 9/11 inside job, this time nuclear and most probably in Baghdad...

1. Reason to invade Iran
2. Blaming Russia for illegal nuke trading
3. "Justified" reason to leave Iraq...

Hopefully i am wrong...

And this crap remains unlocked for all to digest.

LMAO

Your not wrong dude... you're a freak of nature.


Watch this will be edited though. garrenfuckinteed.

1. We already invaded Iran, albeit not with massive ground troops, which will probably not happen, but with special forces.
2. Bush will probably nuke (or otherwise destroy) Iranian nuclear research facilities, not Baghdad, and he doesn't really feel he needs any additional justification.
3. That wouldn't make sense, since we know Iran doesn't have a nuke yet.
4. That wouldn't make sense, since a stable Iraq would help Bush politically and strategically.
5. That wouldn't make sense, since American troops will be stationed in Iraq for decades, and they wouldn't go if they knew a nuke went off there.

2. Bush will probably nuke (or otherwise destroy) Iranian nuclear research facilities, not Baghdad, and he doesn't really feel he needs any additional justification.


Do you think the world will accept a country nuking another country? I think you will be in a world of trouble when that happens.

Do you think the world will accept a country nuking another country? I think you will be in a world of trouble when that happens.

It's actually interesting to think about how the worlds nations would react, if say USA nuked some other country. And sure we all have our own persornal oppionions if such an event should happen, but going from there and to how the politisians in charge would react is one mighty leap.

For my country with our spineless politicians, I think and fear they would take a neutral stance but remain cooperative with the US deluding them self with some mantra that "we must work together", "whats done is done, we must move on"

Its actually interesting to think about how you girls actually think America is gonna nuke someone and you have to discuss it like you know something.

And what does Devine (http://www.nukestrat.com/us/stratcom/gs-divinestrake.htm) Strake (http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/04/divine_guidance.html) mean to you, OliverJ?

Just in case your not aware of this oliverj, this is a discussion forum, contray to what you normaly do and think the main purpose of the site is to create and stimulate discussions in what ever field or topic one may desire.

However I know the erge to spam crap and 1 liners can be huge, but if you have nothing constructive to say, please shutup.

This is a discussion forum to bash America in any way shape or form.
None of you have any facts , all you do is assume the USA is gonna "nuke" someone. You spew rhetoric to make yourselves look intelligent.You girls never deal with actual facts on anything.

USA=bad --- You=hate
Thats all this forum is.

please, somebody ban this guy...

Touch a nerve buddy ?

Facts hurt.

When does a troll not hit a nerve. I'm reporting every irregular post you make from now on.

There are some indications of it, J. We are discussing the implications of it actually happening, such as the upcoming test on an underground tunnel in Nevada. Of course, I'm not sure of one way or another and neither are you. Do you think Bush is too much of a pussy to nuke Iran? I think he's got some issues to work out, and he is perfectly capable of doing it. He's one of those apocalyptic Christians, you know- all too willing to leave the rest of us all "behind".

The notion of America "bashing" is just stupid oxycontin-induced blathering. I mean, Brian Foley does it, but that doesn't mean that anyone who is critical of Bush's insane policies is bashing America.

Actually I take vicodin :)

Had disk surgery 1 month ago.. got a titanium plate screwed onto my spinal column.
thats why I've been here so much the last month. Had off work for that long.

What you said about G.W. and the whole end of the world thing you just said is nothing but speculation. This is the problem I have here, most of you , not all.. spew assumptions, speculations and opinions and push them off as facts. But they are not.
These are the things I point out, and you all want me to be banned ? Hypocritical isnt it ?

When does a troll not hit a nerve. I'm reporting every irregular post you make from now on.


This is the most childish thing I ever saw on this board.

Oooo, "they aren't facts", you really bursted my bubble. Even the executive branch starts with facts and proceeds to speculation and conjecture when deciding policy. That's why they use spies, so that speculation is reduced to a minimum, but the situation is rarely certain.

The facts I start with regarding the possible nuking of Iran are the planned testing of a simulated nuke strike on underground tunnels, the report from Seymour Hersh about the Bush administration seriously considering using nukes (based on officials inside the administration), and the failure of the Bush administration to publically take the option off the table.

Combine this information with Bush pre-emptive strategy, recent unprovoked attack on Iraq, the amount of oil in Iran, appointing Josh Bolton to the UN (not the most diplomatic personality), and the Project for the New American Century's advocating using military power to rebuild the middle east in our image (of which several signees are now in the white house)... and a rational person would conclude that a nuke attack on Iran is possible, a conventional attack probable.

While I don't know if Bush has apocalyptic delusions, he is an evangelical Christian, and they are known for just such a literal interpretation of Revelations. It's not that much of a stretch to put two and two together. It is speculation, but informed speculation.

When does a troll not hit a nerve. I'm reporting every irregular post you make from now on.

This is the most childish thing I ever saw on this board.

Not really, it has been brought on by the vast amount to useless posting done by you.

"He's one of those apocalyptic Christians"

Opinion. Not fact.

Nuking Iran will never happen.(my opinion)

Bunker busters maybe. Are you telling me this would be a bad thing ?

We will wipe Israel off the map

Israel is like a dead tree that will be blown over with one strong wind.

These are the words of an apocalyptic madman !

Your turn.. give me the lines where G.W. ever said we would wipe any nation of the face of the earth.

I don't think Bush means to destroy all of Iran, even he realizes that many Iranians, particularly young people, are very much against the current regime. But attacking them now could turn them all against us. I do think Amendjidaad(sp?) isn't the most rational person, but I don't think much better of our own president. Perhaps Bush thinks it will all work out somehow. He seems to have an inappropriate amount of faith in starting wars.

That being said, there could be circumstances that warrant destroying Iran's nuclear facilities, but it this point I think it would do far more harm than good.

I think the leaders of both the USA and Iran do well to demonstrate the threat that religion poses to peace.

The worst things OliverJ has said are tame in comparison to what some of the trolls on the other side of the fence spew out. It just seems strong to some of you because you already hold extremely biased points of view where America is the enemy and anyone who supports or defends it must either be stupid or without a soul. While what OliverJ says is far from concise, slightly inflamatory, and the like... they don't qualify him for trolldom. At least not anymore than half the talk that goes on around here.

Personally, there is little I would like more than to see the Iranian theocracy toppled and replaced with a democratic, heavily secular government with a staunchly pro-West policy. Do I think we can do it? Perhaps... but not while doing Iraq and Afganastan full justice. I would be content to have every site even hinting of being used for nuclear research, production, or storage bombed out of existence. That could be done with a minimum of effort.

That being said, there could be circumstances that warrant destroying Iran's nuclear facilities, but it this point I think it would do far more harm than good.

I agree.

That wasnt so bad was it ? :bugeye:

i only have one amendmant to what you just posted, huwy:
i think the leaders of both the usa and iran do well to demonstrate the threat that religion poses to peace, when used as a political backdrop.

religion has no place in politics. period.

The worst things OliverJ has said are tame in comparison to what some of the trolls on the other side of the fence spew out. It just seems strong to some of you because you already hold extremely biased points of view where America is the enemy and anyone who supports or defends it must either be stupid or without a soul. While what OliverJ says is far from concise, slightly inflamatory, and the like... they don't qualify him for trolldom. At least not anymore than half the talk that goes on around here.

No, the big difference is that those "other trolls" at least back-up what they say with informational links elsewhere to have some force behind their opinion whereas Ol'J just spews one-liners that say you're wrong, you suck, you're a whacko, etc etc, with nothing to back-up his disagreeing opinions on the opening post.

I'd have no problem with Ol'J disagreeing or even doing slight jabs at calling others morons, just so long as he'd have some kind of information to counter the other person's statements, but when he doesn't, he's the one that looks like the moron. When all you get are one-line insults and nothing but, that's called being a troll. At least have some informational links to show why the person being called a moron is wrong. Be an informative troll, at the very least.

As for the opening post, WorldNetDaily posts nothing but wild stories. I'm still waiting for the U.S. armageddon of all the cities to be nuked from the Cold War's suitcase nukes planted here, heh. However, if even just a small part of what's said is true, it'll be interesting, and I'm referring to the new interview of bin Laden by the journalist, Mir.

- N

No, the big difference is that those "other trolls" at least back-up what they say with informational links elsewhere to have some force behind their opinion whereas Ol'J just spews one-liners that say you're wrong, you suck, you're a whacko, etc etc, with nothing to back-up his disagreeing opinions on the opening post.

I'd have no problem with Ol'J disagreeing or even doing slight jabs at calling others morons, just so long as he'd have some kind of information to counter the other person's statements, but when he doesn't, he's the one that looks like the moron. When all you get are one-line insults and nothing but, that's called being a troll. At least have some informational links to show why the person being called a moron is wrong. Be an informative troll, at the very least.

As for the opening post, WorldNetDaily posts nothing but wild stories. I'm still waiting for the U.S. armageddon of all the cities to be nuked from the Cold War's suitcase nukes planted here, heh. However, if even just a small part of what's said is true, it'll be interesting, and I'm referring to the new interview of bin Laden by the journalist, Mir.

- N

poopypants!!

LOL, I need an informative link to tell the dickweed who posted this crap thats its a bunch of crap..just as you pointed out without an informative link.... :bugeye:

LMAO the madness of this site will never end !! LOL

poopypants!!

Why I outta...

!!!!!!!!!!!!

:p

- N